Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Ian Swanson: Independence fight a battle already lost?

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 04 September 2009
IF ALEX Salmond were to have his way, Scots would be going to the polls in less than 15 months to vote on independence. The Referendum Bill, paving the way for a plebiscite on St Andrew's Day, 30 November 2010, was the centrepiece of the SNP's legislative programme for the coming year presented to the Scottish Parliament yesterday.
But there is virtually no chance of the Bill ever making it to the statute book. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives are all opposed to an independence referendum. Even Margo MacDonald is against it. Unless there is a change of heart by a
ny of the opposition parties, the minority SNP government will be able to count only on the support of the two Green MSPs.

The Nationalists insist an opposition U-turn on the position is not out of the question. They point to Labour's support for a referendum when Wendy Alexander was leader, Lib Dem leader Tavish Scott suggesting he is not opposed in principle to having a referendum and calls by the Tories' former Scottish secretary, Michael Forsyth, for a vote on independence on the same day as the general election. "Anything is possible," says one SNP insider.

But even if the referendum legislation is doomed before it has been published, that does not mean the Bill is pointless. From the SNP's point of view, putting the legislation before parliament will ensure the issue of independence remains firmly on the agenda.

Mr Salmond has indicated he is open to holding a multi-option referendum – if the opposition parties can come up with an alternative constitutional proposal.

That means increased pressure on Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Tories to agree some kind of package of more powers for Holyrood, presumably based on the recommendations of the Calman commission.

If they fail to come forward with their own scheme, it will look as if those opposed to independence cannot get their act together.

If they do come up with a "more powers" option, they will then have to explain why they are not prepared to put it to the people.

If there were to be a referendum, the chances are the independence option would be defeated – but the very fact there had been such a vote would set the precedent for another at some future date.

The SNP's chosen date for a referendum falls after the next UK general election – and if there is a Tory government at Westminster, that could boost support for independence here.

Then, if the opposition parties do block the proposed plebiscite, the SNP can fight the 2011 Holyrood election, saying the other three main parties refused to let the people have their say on the future.

However, depending on the state of the economy by then, voters might be more concerned about their jobs and mortgages and conclude that independence is an irrelevance.

Indeed, the opposition argued yesterday that the SNP's decision to bring forward the Referendum Bill showed the government has its priorities wrong. Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray recalled that the flagship of last year's legislative programme was a Bill to abolish council tax and introduce a Local Income Tax.

The SNP later announced it was abandoning the policy because it recognised there was not majority support for it in parliament. So Mr Gray said the government's legislative programme should be taken with a pinch of salt.

He described the Referendum Bill as "a flagship begging to be scuttled".

He said: "It starts with even less support than the late unlamented Council Tax Bill of last year, and the First Minister's coy hints about multi-options are game- playing when he should be governing."

Labour frontbencher Pauline McNeill argued people were more concerned about the rights of disabled people, better housing, hospital cleanliness and knife crime than the constitution.

She said there had been no increase in support for independence despite the SNP's National Conversation. Labour argued the legislative programme should have included minimum sentences for knife crime, wage and training subsidies and new measures to protect children at risk of abuse.

Mr Gray did say there were issues – and he named the Alcohol Bill – where the party is ready to "look for consensus".

The Tories and Lib Dems still seem firmly opposed to minimum pricing, but the softening of Labour's stance means the controversial plans for tackling alcohol misuse are likely to be passed, albeit with some amendments.

The referendum plans will become the political battleground for the next 12 months – even if everyone already knows how the fight will end.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 04 September 2009 9:03 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Ian Swanson
 
1

The west awake,

Argyll 04/09/2009 09:08:12
Labour said "Bring it on" last year.

Well, here it is.
2

redcliffe62,

04/09/2009 09:13:59
with cyclops and his warmongers so on the nose, and the tories smelling like a year old curry the fact is salmond in charge is not that bad an option in comparison. the squibs need a policy, any policy to hang onto.

the view may be "give salmond a go as he cannot be as bad as they are", so not an endorded positive vote perhaps, but more perhaps an anti negative vote.
let me explain.

this time even the greater unwashed sun readers will question the media telling the scots there will be doom and gloom and scotland will not work, for as badly as labour has done under cameron and with the economy still rooted it will be no better.

whether maddox sees the light by then, or the headline on electon day will be "snp accused of potentially wimnning election" we shall have to wait and see.
3

The west awake,

Argyll 04/09/2009 09:18:52
Labours problem is that the Labour vote is a gray vote, but the grey heads will remember the tragic farce that was the "fighting 50" in the 80s.
Labours self-termed "fighting 50" let Scotland down on a biblical scale last time the Tories got in. What kind of incentive does that give us Scots to trust them again?

The Union is FAR from safe.
4

Jason Scorne,

04/09/2009 10:16:11
Despite the usual Unionist rhetoric, I would not be surprised if Cameron encouraged the Scottish Tories to support this, justifying it as "let the people have their say".

The real reason is that, after the shambles that Gordon Brown has reduced the UK to, the English won't want anything to do with the Scots and would be happy to see us go.
5

hoblar,

04/09/2009 10:43:44
The reason that the "SNP accused' headline is the main one is to belittle the Independence Referendum, but just like hoping to stitch up the Scottish parliament to return Labour nohopes ad infinitum FAILED< so will the efforts of the opposition coalition triplet parties, the Dreaded Labour, the dreaded tories and the dreadful libdems to scupper a vote on Scotland's future will come back and haunt them.

Ian gray doesn't speak for Scotland in any manner, and yet the whole article is dedicated to making this pygmy and other 'opposition' clowns, who are too scared to even allow this referendum to take place get the say.

We all know that gray and the minions don't want a referendum, it is the job of this newspaper to make them explain why.

Also, it is traditional, when a policy is launched, to dedicate some of the rhetoric to those for it rather than 'launching' it like it is an anti referendum legislation going through the Scottish parliament, which is the impression you get from the opposition quote a thon above.
6

crivensjings,

Ayrshire 04/09/2009 11:08:48
Twitchy is perfectly correct in his assertion that the Scottish Government should be focussing on the economy and the growing unemployment figures. McNeil is also correct in her demands to see improvements in Scotland's overall social and moral condition. I have no doubt that the Scottish Government will forge ahead and tackle these problems but first it will be necessary to seize control of our own wealth in its entirety and ensure that it is used to improve the lot of Scotland and the Scots before all else instead of funding wars in the middle east, a Westminster government which can't accept that there is no Empire anymore and a British establshment which is only interested in lining its own pockets.

Only a Scottish based party with its loyalties solely focussed on Scotland can do this and this is exactly why a referendum is a priority.

It is sickening the way in which the London-based unionist parties block every attempt by the SNP government to turn Scotland into a modern, prosperous and healthy 21st century nation.
7

BIG EYE,

Paisley 04/09/2009 11:19:23
The Unionists seem to be depending on Scots being totally thick. They seem to be arguing that it is ridiculous to discuss constitutional reform in the middle of an economic crisis.

Two points here

1. According to the PM and Chancellor Britain will be over the crisis early in 2010. Do they not believe him?

2. For Scotland's government to be able to take significant steps to improve the economy in Scotland they need the powers on the economy currently reserved by Westminster to make this happen.

If this is the best excuse they can come up with for not having a referendum then they are in real trouble.

Another factor, already identified by other posters is the the UK election requires to be held in the first half of 2010 and it is a virtual certainty that the Tories will be elected. Whether they are or not whoever wins will no longer be able to postpone the cuts that are required to balance the UK's books as this Government has been doing and that is going to have a major effect on Scots attitudes. We should always rememeber that it was WESTMINSTER that was responsible for the mess we are all currently in.

One problem of course is that if Scotland was to vote in favour of independence the pound may very well collapse as it is only the oil revenue that is keeping it afloat at the moment. That is not a political view it is the view of the international credit agencies.
8

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 04/09/2009 11:21:34
A referendum on Independence gives us a decision on our future that we can and should make for ourselves. Often one reads comments of the sort - "if the Scots want independence why don't they just go for it" - but of course, in order to do so a referendum is required. Frequently, decisions on Scotland's future are taken furth of Scotland or, like the Calman Commission, without asking the wider public for their views. Micro-managing devolution is only likely to urge more people on to independence.

I feel strongly that the decision be made in Scotland. After all, if Scotland were to vote NO and England YES, or vice versa, where would the Union stand then? Also, if Britain were to have a referendum on joining the Euro would it be reasonable to expect that the right to decide Britain's position be extended to all of Europe? I suspect not. If, as many believe, we are to be a mature nation taking our own decisions, then this would be the place to start.
9

Colkitto,

River Clyde 04/09/2009 11:45:25
The SNP have every right to bring the referendum Bill. If the opposition parties don't agree with it it's up to them to explain why.
I'll go as far and say, if the opposition parties don't vote for the Bill to take place, they will have lost their best chance of defeating a YES vote.
Once the Tories get in it's game set and match for independence
10

Pantaloon,

04/09/2009 12:03:07

Not everyone wants independence.

And Alex Salmond doesn't speak on behalf of Scotland.
11

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 04/09/2009 12:11:16
#10, Pantaloon,

You are really pointing out the obvious. Not everyone wants independence, so we need a referendum to find out whether the majority do or not. And Alex Salmond doesn't speak on behalf of Scotland, so we need a referendum to let those he doesn't speak for express their point of view. I'm sure Alex Salmond would support those who disagree with him having the right to express their views in a - wait for it - referendum.
12

The Master,

04/09/2009 12:19:24
Well done to Margot for cutting through the pointless Nationalist posturing: this bill is being brought forward for reasons internal to the SNP and, as such, serves no useful purpose whatsoever to Scotland as a whole.

Don't hold your breath for any kind of reaction at the ballot box after the mainstream parties treat the bill with the contempt it deserves.
13

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 04/09/2009 12:27:34
Let us hope that the debate of this bill rises above the abysmal level shown on Wednesday.
Iain Gray's "Sid James" comment on Alex Salmond, the most tasteless attempt at humour we have heard in a long time, must surely have been the lowest point in any debate in Holyrood to date.
14

Pantaloon,

04/09/2009 12:31:24
#11

I know I am stating the obvious, and i would love a referendum.

If only to see the majority of Scottish people wipe the floor with arrogant Alex Salmond and his band of merry men and put them in there place.

We should have a referendum, clip the nats wings and get this fanciful idea buried once and for all.
15

Iain Mac,

04/09/2009 12:54:31
A lot of Labour voters are pro-indenpendence. Some MSPs may be too. But will they have the courage to openly vote for it? After all, why should Labour be pro-Union? Keir Hardie was pro-Home Rule and many other famous socialists like John Maclean and James Connolly saw the breakup of the UK and the Empire as progress.
16

Iain Mac,

04/09/2009 12:55:46
#14 - sorry pantsman. A substantial minority of Labour and Tory probably would vote for independence. AS would the Greens and Socialists. It's not just the SNP who want it.
17

hoblar,

04/09/2009 12:57:58
"I know I am stating the obvious, and i would love a referendum.

If only to see the majority of Scottish people wipe the floor with arrogant Alex Salmond and his band of merry men and put them in there place.

We should have a referendum, clip the nats wings and get this fanciful idea buried once and for all."

yet you are one of the few who back the political unionist parties that are too scared to vote for a referendum.

Typical cowardly lot, think they can tell me and others (numerous amounts) what to think and do for the future of Scotland.

I can tell you one thing, there are very very few Scots who would say "I am willing to go for whatever Ian gray says"....the labour branch in Scotland, like their uk party are nothing more than a joke.

18

Linda,

Edinburgh 04/09/2009 13:09:25
The Lib Dems are totally undemocratic in opposing a referendum.

I want Independence for Scotland as we have been too long in this abject condition with poverty, ill health,loss of population and lack of opportunity despite our natural wealth. This is due to 50 years of a dependency culture and lack of confidence which is enforced by those who support the Union and claim Scotland is too poor or stupid to run its affairs just like any other normal democratic nation.
19

Eve,

04/09/2009 13:43:45
#1 The west awake: It's only words and they came form Wendy Alxsander, she like a few other Labour MSPs talks and talks so much that there is no time to think things through let alone take action.

Everything that the unionsit partys do is for short term gain, they don't like long term gain strattages because they have to stick with it for a longer period of time than they want to and also they have to have something to talk about improving or they come across as useless.

One thing that I'm deffently pleased about the SNP MSPs and minsters is that they have taken some long term stragges on boared.
20

Ronaldinho Glavin,

04/09/2009 13:53:59
Can we have Independence when the UK votes Tory and then rejoin when someone else is in charge?

Crossing your fingers and hoping for a tory government smacks of putting the shot-term interest of the administration ahead of the long-term interest of the country.
21

Ronaldinho Glavin,

04/09/2009 13:59:08
Most people are neither for nor against independence including many of those described here as 'unionists'

Most people are dontgiveamonkeys-ist and have yet to be convinced of the need to make such a fundamental change. To most of us the costs are uncertain and the benefits are nebulous: there is no love of the Union, just a suspicion of people who offer easy solutions to complex, but otherwise not particularly important, problems.
22

D Williams,

04/09/2009 14:02:46
"Independence fight a battle already lost?".

Yes. As soon as SNP got into Governemnt and proved how inept they are. "President Salmond" ? Give me a break. George W Bush mark II.
23

BIG EYE,

Paisley 04/09/2009 14:09:47
22

You can call the SNP names but one of them is not inept as every week they run rings round the opposition in Holyrood.

Irrespective of political allegiance the capability of this SNP government is widely recognised as being of a much higher standard than any of the previous LAB/LIB adminstrations.
24

Mikey,

Carstairs Junction 04/09/2009 14:29:56
#7, the problem is that a lot of Scots ARE totally thick!! How else can you justify being a Labour supporter?

Apart from being thick, they also seem to be submissive sado-masochists. No matter how much the Labour party does them over, they STILL lie there saying "Thank you sir. May I have another?"
25

crivensjings,

Ayrshire 04/09/2009 14:39:42
#22 Well said Big Eye, the SNP government has for the first time given Scotland a professional and confident team of politicians looking after Scotland's interests rather than the second rate band of jumped up toon cooncillors that London Labour's Scottish branch employs to do their bidding for them.
26

D Williams,

04/09/2009 14:42:06
#23 "this SNP government is widely recognised as being of a much higher standard than any of the previous LAB/LIB adminstrations".

What, by the blind, deaf and dumb" ?
27

D Williams,

04/09/2009 14:44:34
#25 "the SNP government has for the first time given Scotland a professional and confident team of politicians looking after Scotland's interests".

Jings, I missed you and Big Eye performing at the fringe - your some double-act !
28

Pantaloon,

04/09/2009 15:42:06
#23

"this SNP government is widely recognised as being of a much higher standard than any of the previous LAB/LIB adminstrations"

Really? By whom? Can you direct me to the survey or report that states this fact you are claiming?

Or is it a statement made by you, a loving SNP supporter to support your argument?

#24

Anyone who supports Labour is thick? I'm glad the SNP supporters are finally showing their true colours and displaying how much contempt they have for people who are non SNP supporting. Its rather patronising to call someone thick due to the fact they do not have the same political views are yourself. Your statement says a lot more about your level of intelligence than it does about the intelligence of others.

And for the record, i'm not a labour, lib, snp, green or monster laving loony party supporter. I have no allegiance to any party and as such i can sit and be objective to all parties, and recently the SNP have hit rock bottom in my estimation.
29

BIG EYE,

Paisley 04/09/2009 16:41:29
I clearly failed to recognise that Unionist parties plummeting in the polls should be regarded as good news for the Union.

Silly me!
30

King O The Picts,

The Press Crime Commission 04/09/2009 23:04:35
Is this story for real
and some of these comments are laughable.
The SNP came to power on a platform of independence, I believe I am correct in that assumption, is has been their cornerstone since the partys foundation.
The Scottish people who voted them into power were aware of this, and they have continued to consolidate their position since coming to office courtesy of the general voting public.
There are a sizable and growing, yes growing sector of the public who are if not allready commited to sepperation not far from the edge of realisation.
Independence is not the brainchild of the SNP the SNP are where they are because those of us who desire sepperation put them there, remember this is a democracy, much to the chargrin of the Hootsmun.
#24 to say that Labour supporters are thick, this is wrong to do...the Labor party has held the Scottish electorate in contempt now for several decades, and have elected many political fools to is leadership, showing its abillity to make solid descisions while aptly handeling great pressure, so while stupid may not be the word to use the correct term for this level of pollitical incompetance, is just eluding me at the moment.
If the wish for part of this democracy to express its wishes to sepperate from the UK are so far from being realised please explain to me why the party who embodies Scotlands desire for Self determination is the same party who are now consolidating their political platform while commanding the leadership at the behest of the electorate.
31

Alan B,

04/09/2009 23:53:23
#D Williams

If you looked at the 4 parties with any sort of objectivity you would soon come to the conclusion that labour have the worst set of msps by a long way.

McLeish and Deacon were the only 2 that stood out for labour and they are long gone. McConnell ditching little talent labour msp had to surround himself with his small clique left the worst government scotland has had.

The snp on the other hand seem to have the most capable set of msps. Goldie stands out for the tories but noone else (particularly with McLetchies downfall). The libs have had some msp that make decent ministers but have failed to have any leadership. They could do with a rejuvinated kennedy.

I think you really have been smoking something bad if you seriously cannot see the current government in scotland is far better that the poor labour led administrations we have had. Labour went from potential but very accident prone ie could not mark the exams when the new highers were introduced to transport shambles like not signing the doc for the bridge tolls, a joke under the mcconnell. I mean the joke that is Cathie Jamieson says it all.
32

Westfield Bairns,

Falkirk 05/09/2009 01:36:46
Independence is going to happen only the timescale is up for debate.

Scotland a Country but many major decisions decided in another Country, by any standards that is a strange affair. And what of England the biggest constituent Country, do they not deserve a Parliament and the same level of Democracy as Scotland.
There are and always have been rumblings in both Countries and now the Political landscape has changed for good the enevitable will happen.

Ah worrying times if you are a Unionist and unfortunatly things aint going to improve for you. Bring it on
33

Pericles of Selkirk,

05/09/2009 02:26:25
The SNP promised a bill, well here it is.
34

Gtj,

06/09/2009 10:07:47
"Independence fight a battle already lost?" - You wish.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.